1947 U.N.'s Special Commission on Palestine - Essay Example

? 1947 U.N.'S Special Commission on Palestine Introduction 1947 U.N.'s Special Commission on Palestine is a committee was created as a response to the request of making recommendations under the article 10 of Charter by the U.K government. This was in concern of Palestine’s future government. The government of British had earlier also made a recommendation to establish a special committee which was to prepare a report for General assembly. UNSCOP was set up by the General Assembly to investigate the root and possibly a solution for the Palestine’s conflict. UNSCOP is making up of representatives from 11 nations. Our visit as a commission included gathering of testimonies from organization of Zionists was boycotted by the higher committee of Arab. This paper work gives the assessment of the four options, which are Arab rule; Zionist rule; a bi-national state. Discussion The 19th century came with it the Palestinian- Israel conflict. In 1920 this conflict bore violence which is still continuing today. The Jews and the Arabs formed movement in the 29th century. These movements fought towards attaining their respective people’s sovereignty. Hallowed land and Zionism are some of the major causes of this conflict. The Great Britain allowed the Jews to immigrate to Palestinian land on which they had control. This conflict escalated when over 6 million Jews lost their lives on the hands of the Nazis on a Holocaust. Afterwards the Jews were allowed to migrate into Palestine. It was then that Israel was established, on Palestine’s land. This led to onset of a war that has born various battles and attacks of land in the region. Lots of Palestine citizens have become refugees in Middle East since 1948. It was in 148 that Israel established itself as a nation. Palestine use force to try and reclaim a land that was once theirs from the Jews. They also fight for the refugees who are still suffering yet they have their lands (Zanotti, 2010). During a talk with the British, the Arabs insisted on a unitary majority state for Arabs. Officials representing Palestine from the Jewish Agency opposed the Arabs and preferred partitioning Palestine. There are four options of potential rulers of the Palestine, which are Zionist rule, Arab rule, partitioned, and a bi-national state (Tal, 2000). Zionism rules the world and this is much reflected in the United States of America. It was in 1997 when the Zionist Congress was convened by Theodore Herzl. All that has happened to the Human race since Herzl is traceable to the world conquest protocol plan. Before Herzl, political Zionism was unpopular. Zionism is accountable to all that has occured in the United States of America. Most effects of Zionism rule are negatively felt. Zionism is believed to have been sacrificing Jews for several years now, and it is still dong it up to date. There are notable achievements in the United States as a result of Zionism, but the negativities shadow them. Zionism is hence not the best preferred rule for Palestine (Hurewitz, 1998). Arabs felt that the British had unfairly favored the Jews outside Palestine and did not like foreign rule. As a result of these frustrations, the Arabs planned and attacked the Jews. To Arabs Palestine was more of a battle field and its people were seen as a source of man power and taxes. The Arabs there have never been interested in Palestine as an empire. They never saw any value attached to Palestine, and that explains why there is no Palestinian Jew. Arabs rulers use Palestine as a leverage. This way, they use it to control their population by drifting their people’s anger away from their backward and oppressive regimes (Akasaka, 2007). The ongoing war in Palestine is, however, not for overcoming Israel, but it is for defining the strongest tribe among the fighters. Hence this is the main Objective of Human involvement in the war. After considering the reasons of Arabs fight in Palestine, we, as a committee does not see Arabs rule as the best suited to rule Palestine (Tal, 2000). We have also considered the bi- national state rule as possible and best suited rule for Palestine. The Arab government does not put what they claim to their reason to fight in test. They do not stand tall in defending Islam as a religion. During the wars in the recent past, the Zionists have emerged stronger than the Arabs. However, this does not justify Zionist as the ultimate winners as their motivation of the fight is not justice (Zanotti, 2010). Arabs advanced technology, political, financial and military assistance from the Western has contributed much to their glory. A bi-national solution will leave Palestine as a single state which is better placed than being partitioned. The rate of population growth of Palestinians is growing rapidly and the placed final agreement is far from being achieved. These two factors are making the bi-national state a preferred option by many Palestinians. United Nation committee also feels that this would be the best for Palestine. This would create federal, confederate and unitary state. Israelites will terminate it own character as a Jew state. On the other hand, the Palestine will have to give up their want for national independence for their land. Weighing the two consequences, they are more beneficial compared to the losses incurred in the continuing fight (Hurewitz, 1998). Through a national state, a political case is achieved where both Jews and the Palestinians retain their diverse political and legal character. This situation leaves minority of the cases well protected. However, there is an argument that this solution might politically entrench the two identities. This entrenchment would catalyze continued rivalry and social division (Akasaka, 2007). Equality will, however, not be clinched in our solution. This is due to the belief that what matters most is the number of people. This leaves the Jews that, within the time, they might lose their identity as the majority in the state. A bi- national state will offer protection to the minority, but it will not take their fear for their identity. This might, therefore, fuel them to keep struggling for their independency even thereafter. All in all, this is the best solution to end or ease conflict (Akasaka, 2007). Division has never been a wise solution to any conflict. This is like running away from a problem rather than dealing with it. Partitioning of Palestine based on locations of the two antagonists is not very wise (Hurewitz, 1998). Fighting is likely to continue since the two will then want to enlarge their boundaries with time. The conflict will end up continuing and maybe even get worse. Treating to treat the cause of the conflict would be the best solution, but it will take much time than we have. We, therefore, feel that bringing them together and setting rules that will govern their existence will be best. According to U.N partition plan, creation of independent Jewish, Arab states and international Regime for Jerusalem city was the best ruling option. The U.S General Assembly recommended implementation and adaptation of pertain in November 29 1947. The Jewish community accepted the plan while the Arab failed to embrace it. This led to the outbreak of a civil war (Tal, 2000). The U.N should have sent intermediaries to try talking with the two tribes. Through the talk, it would have easily detected the major cause of this conflict from the horse’s mouth. Also through talks, the U.N would have gathered what the antagonist felt would settle the scores. Trying to bring the two into conciliation even before mentioning plans like partitions would have also been wise (Zanotti, 2010). Conclusion 1947 U.N.'s Special Commission on Palestine assisted in educating people on the importance of togetherness and showing them how co-exist. This is because it assisted people see and realize the value of their partners, which could be an asset to them through embracing each other. For this method to work, the mediators had to have the antagonists’ best interest at heart. Moreover, open mindedness in listening to them is also very necessary. If both the Jews and the Arabs are made to realize how much the conflict and wars is dragging them behind, perhaps they would think twice. As a member of the U.Ns committee, I feel that the bi-national state solution is the left best choice among the other mentioned options. References Akasaka, K. ( 2007, February). The Question of Palestine and the United Nations. Retrieved November 1, 2012, from unispal.un.org/pdfs/DPI2499.pdf Hurewitz, J. C. (1998). The UN and Disimperialism in the Middle East. International Organization, 19 (3), 749. Tal, D. (2000). The Forgotten War: Jewish--Palestinian Strife in Mandatory Palestine, December 1947--May 1948. Israel Affairs, 6 (3), 3. Zanotti, J. (2010). Palestinians: Background and U. S. Relations. New York: Diane Publishing. Read More